The MRC should stop finding excuses, and take decisive action to stop Laos and Cambodia from going ahead with any further Hydropower Dam development in the Mekong River mainstream and major tributaries.

Every member of the MRC and of the National Mekong Committees of the Four Lower Mekong countries (Thailand, Laos, Cambodia & Vietnam) KNOWS that Hydropower:

Hydropower Dams in the Mekong basin are actually INCREASING POVERTY and Despair, instead of “improving the standard of living and decreasing poverty” as falsely advertised. It is displacing tens of thousands of people from poor communities from their homes, lands and cultural sites, while offering a dismal compensation, which does not support the people to cultivate food or to fish, forcing them into a “market-life style” promoted by the Chinese, but without appropriate training nor money for food! (Despite the empty promises by the Developers to provide training).

Biodiversity is deeply interlinked with Food Security & Nutrition, and they all depend on a Sustainable Ecosystem. Thereby the need to protect ecosystems that support high biodiversity such as the Mekong River!

It is sheer lunacy to knowingly continue building Hydropower Dams, which are NOT sustainable developments, enhance Extinction rates, put at RISK the Biodiversity, the Food Security, Nutrition & Health of 60 Million poor people in SE Asia!

“Current foods systems are facing mounting challenges to provide growing populations with safe, diverse and nutritionally adequate foods because of resource constraints, environmental degradation as well as the continual narrowing of the food base and the loss of biodiversity. Biodiversity is intricately intertwined with food security and nutrition, for it is critical to the availability of nutrients needed to support health and well-being, as well as to the sustainability of the natural resource base upon which food systems rely. Nutrition is at the heart of the sustainable development agenda.”

The social, environment and economic impacts of upstream Hydropower development on downstream countries were clearly summarized by Kuenze, C et al.(2012):

“Examining hydropower development within the Mekong Basin reveals an obvious conflict interestbetween the needs of upstream and downstream countries,and especially between the priorities of Mekong upper class decision makers directly or indirectly proﬁting from the dams and the majority of the rural poor, whose livelihood they put at risk.

Main stem and tributary hydropower dams impact ﬂood-pulse timing variability, which can have grave effects on ecologic niches, ecosystems and biodiversity. They lead to a long-term decrease in downstream sediment load, which reduces the nutritious load to plains, wetlands and agricultural areas.

Sediment loss is expected to aggravate coastal erosion and saltwater intrusion in the Mekong delta—a region already threatened by sea level rise. Endangered natural environments are, however, not only the Mekong delta, but also the Tonle Sap and southern Cambodian ﬂoodplains. These regions host over one-third of the Mekong Basin population, which depends heavily onﬁsh catch as a source of daily protein.

Migrating ﬁsh will, however, be hindered on their pathway by hundreds of metres of high concrete walls. Fish ladders on such constructions have proven to be mostly inadequate in design, and also cannot prevent migratory ﬁsh from losing their sense of orientation when they end up in a slow ﬂowing large reservoir instead of a stream.

At the dam sites themselves, forced relocationof rural populations oftenleads to a decrease in resilience and impoverishment.

All the above underline the complexities of the water-food-energy nexus in the Mekong region. Many authors argue that the environmental and social costs of cascading the Mekong and its tributaries probably outweigh the beneﬁtsof energy generation, improved navigability, and associated economic development.”

Any new Dams will ensure the extinction of hundreds of aquatic species, a massive loss of biodiversity, the irreparable damage to the Tonle Sap Lake nurseries, will continue sinking the Mekong Delta, and increase the number of ‘Environmental refugees’ fleeing the Delta. Such exodus already started in early 2016, with thousands of Vietnamese being forced off their land by subsidence, salinization and drought. This resulted in the loss of productive land in the Delta and with it, the loss of crops and property.

“About 971,200 hectares of farming area in eight provinces of the Mekong Delta has been affected by salt water, Le Quoc Doanh, Deputy Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development, said.”

The more Hydropower dams are built upstream, the more serious the impacts felt downstream! Every new Hydropower Dam is another nail in the coffin of the Mekong Delta of Vietnam.

According to Dr. Le Anh Tuan of Can Tho University (Personal Communication, Feb 2016), over HALF the population of the Mekong Delta, i.e. 10 MILLION people (!) could become “Environmental Refugees” as the result of the Mekong Delta sinking over 1-1.5 metres – courtesy of more Hydropower dams upstream retaining vital sediments that keep the Delta afloat; and, exacerbated by rising sea levels due to Climate Warming. In turn, Climate Warming is further increased by constant GHG emissions by Hydropower Dams!

“An environmental refugee is someone forced to leave their traditional habitat, temporarily or permanently, because of a marked environmental disruption” (as defined by Prof Essam El-Hinnawi.)

New Studyfindings indicate a WORSE scenario than that mentioned above:

It has been estimated that, if the sea level rises by ONE METER > 39 % of the Mekong River Delta’s lands will be under water!

“This could displace more than 7 MILLION residents and flood the homes of more than 14.2 MILLION people in the Mekong River Delta; in addition to submerging HALF of the region’s cultivated land (Warner et al., 2009).”

“Sea-level rise, combined with other slow-onset processes, is expected to increase saltwater intrusion and degrade freshwater resources, reducing the viability of cultivable land and destroying mangrove forests, especially in the south of the country (ADB, 2013a).”

On the other hand, it is important to recognize that:

Laos officials in charge of the Hydropower projects on the Mekong mainstream, are effectively the main decision makers and decide the future of the Lower Mekong River and its 60 Million people. They happen to be under the control and tutelage of China, and supported by Oxfam Australia (Oxfam Manager for Cambodia, Personal Communication, October 2015.)

Of great concern is Laotian officials high level of ignorance, and disregard for social and environmental welbeing. The Director-General of the Lao Ministry of Energy and Mines, Daovong Phonekeo, told Radio Free Asiaduring a meeting of the Mekong River Commission (MRC) in Luang Prabang on Feb. 17, 2017:

“The Lao government has already decided to go ahead with the [Pak Beng] project because it is a good project,” he said.

“It will turn water into a USEFUL RESOURCE instead of letting the water flow down the River USELESSLY. We want to make this resource more valuable.” (!?!)

NOTE: A main Laotian bureaucrat that makes the decisions that affect the Lower Mekong River and WHO SEES NO VALUE IN A RIVER,which feeds 60 million people, supports a $7 billion dollar fisheries industry, provides water for drinking, irrigation, a multi-million dollar aquaculture industry, and supports a multi-billion agriculture industry, among a myriad of other services,is indeed a serious threat to the shared governance of the Mekong River.

As he clearly stated, Laos has already decided to forge ahead with its 3rd Dam in the Mainstream of the Mekong River, the Pak Beng Dam – regardless of the fact that there isn’t a completed EIA in place and not caring what the MRC says…

On the other hand, at the same event in Luang Pragang in Feb. 2017, the CEO of the MRC, Mr Pham Tuan Phan, did not acknowledge the Pak Beng Dam is going ahead. Instead hestated:

“According to the procedures, we have one month to review whether documents and data of the project are comprehensive or not, and 6 months later, we will consider the project on technical aspects. Thus far, we could not give out any comment yet. After 3 or 4 more months, we will conduct another regional consultation meeting on this project. At that time, we will able to give out some certain assessments.”

The meetings with the MRC are clearly a ‘mere formality’ to pretend all diplomatic avenues are being covered… It begs the question: Why bother and waste valuable sponsorship money if Laos will do as it pleases regardless? It’s an exercise on futility, and a Machiavelic charade…

CONCLUSIONS

The MRC and the governments of China, Thailand, Laos, Cambodia, Vietnam, and Australia –are promoting a Humanitarian Crisis in SE Asia as never before seen, in the name of “Economic Development & Growth”:

Loss of Food Security for60 Million people

Displacement of up to 14 Million people in the Mekong Delta alone

Displacement of tens of thousands of people for Dams’ reservoirs

Irreversible Loss of Biodiversity

IrreversibleEcological damage

Irreversible damage to the Fisheries &
Economies of Vietnam and Cambodia.

It is unacceptable that this be doneto favor Trade Agreements, which mostly benefit the Elite, Developers, Companies and Banks, but not the people.

This lack of social and environmental responsibility is immoral and highly unethical!

We urge the MRC to STOP the “diplomatic excuses” and take action as per your mission statement. There are enough studies that support a Ban on Hydropower Development in the Mekong basin for all the reasons stated above, and as the MRC itself advised in 2010.

Laos and Cambodia must not be allowed to build any more Dams in the Mekong River Mainstream or major tributaries, as proposed.

If the MRC really cared and wanted to align to its core mission of ensuring the balanced and equitable use of the Mekong River, it could apply the principles of International Law – regarding the Shared Governance of the Mekong River – by taking the case to the High Court in Geneva to resolve the issuesof: protection of the Food Security of 60 Million people, the biodiversity and the viability of the Mekong River Ecosystem.

For other details, we invite you to listen to our Podcast #1 , which offers the public an Overview of this “Mekong River Ecocide”, and spells the facts as they are. A forthcoming Second Podcast will address: the MRC lack of responsibility permitting the construction of other Dams, such as Pak Beng Dam to go ahead. We’ll also expand on the impacts on the Mekong Delta, the Tonle Sap Lake & Wetlands, Aquaculture and more.

https://www.scientists4mekong.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Floating-Village-in-Mekong-River-near-Kampong-Cham-Cambodia.-Photo-by-Shanti-Cantrelle.jpg1961024Editorhttps://www.scientists4mekong.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/scientists4themekong_logo.jpgEditor2017-03-17 21:55:072017-03-23 05:26:32Open Letter to the Mekong River Commission

According to fishermen & villagers we #interviewed in February 2016, from Laos to Cambodia, dwindling fish stocks were already a frightening reality since the construction of the #Xayabury Dam in Laos. The decrease in fish catches had been felt and compounded by the construction of many Dams in #tributaries in Laos, by the #DonSahong Dam in Laos/border with Cambodia, and by the #LowerSesan2 Dam in a main tributary in NE Cambodia...

Since then, many Hydropower Dams have been built and dozens more are under construction in #Laos, with plans for 170 more dams.

Hence, the Mekong River ecosystem is in extreme peril, as are the Food & Water Security for 60 Million people in the Lower Mekong Basin...

The #collapse of the Xe-Pian Xe-Namnoy Dam in July 2018, which left over 6,000 Laotians homeless and affected tens of thousands in Cambodia, hasn't changed any Dam construction plans in either country... 😰

Construction of dams in Laos is threatening the livelihood of fishermen, like these shown in the southern Mekong region of Champasak.

The tiny Southeast Asian nation of Laos champions itself as "the battery of Southeast Asia," exporting hydroelectricity to its neighbors as it seeks to exit the ranks of least developed countries.

But developing hydropower -- Laos' major national industry -- is threatening the numerous fishing villages that line the Mekong River, which are seeing fish stocks dwindle as new dams spring up.

In the village of Nakasang on the southern banks of the river, a forty-seven-year-old Moai Chai Leopas sighed. "Since they began making the dam, the fish have been disappearing," she said, referring to the Don Sahong Dam project. "If things continue like this, we won't have enough money to send our children to school."

Laos has hoped to exploit its mountain ranges to produce and sell hydroelectricity. But as dam projects proceed, the country is being forced to rethink its priorities: #electricity or #fish?

It appears the latter are losing.

Construction of Don Sahong Dam in the Mekong Basin, overseen by Malaysia-based Mega First, is proceeding rapidly. When completed in 2019, the facility is expected to generate 2028 gigawatts of power annually.

Don Sahong Dam. Completion of the dam is scheduled for 2019.
Rumors of dwindling fish stocks began to surface in 2016, soon after construction by China's state-owned Sinohydro kicked off. "It became so hard to make a living that some people went to Thailand to find work," Moai Chai said.

Diminishing stocks have also driven fish prices up. "Before [construction], even an expensive batch of fish was about 40,000 kip per kilogram ($4.72). Now, it's more than twice that," noted a thirty-year-old driver in the village.

The fish shortage is being felt nationwide. Laos is a landlocked country, and its cuisine centers around fish from the Mekong. Champasak Province -- where Dong Sahong is being built -- is famous for its delicately fragranced fish, which eventually find their way from Nakasang to cities and towns throughout the country via the regional capital of Pakse.

"Freshwater fish from the Mekong is a vital ingredient in Laotian cuisine," according to Taku Mori of Japan-Laos Creative Partners.

New dams also threaten the endangered Irrawaddy dolphin. Mekong Watch, a nongovernmental organization, recently warned that Dong Sahong was "having a negative and irreversible effect" on the environment.

Still, hydroelectric plants are multiplying in Laos, driven by foreign investment from electricity-hungry countries like Thailand and China.

By 2024, Laos aims to have weaned itself from the United Nation's least developed country list on the back of industries that earn foreign currency. With no significant sectors other than some mining exports, Laos is depending on selling electricity. The Ministry of Energy and Mines plans to build 159 new hydropower generators by 2030.

The country's ambitions suffered a setback after a huge dam collapse in late July in the southern province of Attapeu. The failure of the Xe-Pian Xe-Namnoy Dam destroyed villages and left around 6,000 people homeless in a disaster that forced the government to investigate construction flaws and review safety standards.

But the review is less likely to address the effects of dams on the environment and food culture, and any construction projects underway are unlikely to be halted.

The #Pak_Lay Dam is the 4th Dam planned on the #mainstream of the #Mekong River in #Laos. Fascinating how the Mekong River Commision opened the "Prior Consultation Process" for this new Dam, only ONE DAY AFTER the Laotian government announced a #suspension of all new #hydropower projects -following the collapse of the Xe Pian-Xe Nam Noy hydropower Dam...😱😠

" "Save the Mekong", a coalition of non-governmental organizations, community-based groups and concerned citizens within the Mekong region, issued a #statement on Friday announcing their intention to #boycott the Mekong River Commission’s (MRC’s) Prior Consultation for the proposed Pak Lay dam."

"Prior Consultation is a requirement of the 1995 Mekong Agreement for countries jointly to review any development project proposed for the mainstream Mekong, with an aim to reach an agreement on whether or not it should proceed, and if so, under what conditions."

"The Save the Mekong coalition is boycotting the Pak Lay Prior Consultation because serious and outstanding concerns regarding each of the mainstream dams that have undergone the process to date – the Xayaburi, Don Sahong and Pak Beng dams – remain unresolved."

"Furthermore, the Pak Lay Prior #Consultation began just one day after the Laotian government announced a #suspension of new hydropower projects in the wake of the tragic Xe Pian-Xe Nam Noy hydropower project disaster in Attapeu, southern Laos."

Goes to show the Laos government is going at full throttle with its plans for many Dams (120 Dams in tributaries). This is despite the dire consequences of the Dam collapse recently experienced ...😠💀💀💀

Share on Facebook Follow on Facebook Add to Google+ Connect on Linked in Subscribe by Email Print This Post CHIANG RAI – Save the Mekong, a coalition of non-governmental organizations, community-based groups and concerned citizens within the Mekong region, issued a statement on Friday announcin...

I had missed this very important news.
Formosa Steel, was already #fined millions of dollars for the massive #pollution of its #toxic_waste that lead to a huge #fish_kill and pollution of hundreds of kilometres of coastline and aquaculture farms.

Yet, they go ahead #again and try to #cheat the system by burying 100 tons of #toxic mud... WTH?? It's #irresponsible companies like this that should be #shut_down for the safety of people and environment!!!

"Investigators are looking at how and why 100 tons of waste from Formosa's steel factory found it's way onto a farm in Ha Tinh.
Ha Tinh authorities have found that the Urban Environment Company (UEC) in Ky Anh District was responsible for burying over 100 tons of industrial waste released by Formosa Ha Tinh Steel – the culprit behind Vietnam’s recent mass fish kills.

UEC only specializes in providing conventional waste-treatment services. Ha Tinh's Department of Natural Resources and Environment said the contract between FHS and UEC to treat conventional waste would have been fine, but the deal to treat 100 tons of black mud since the beginning of April was a violation."

The problems in the Mekong Delta can't possibly be solved by Vietnam alone! There needs to be a concerted effort by all upstream Mekong riparian countries to clean their act.

By Dr. Lilliana Corredor, Founder,
Scientists4Mekong, Aug. 26, 2018

Vietnam is the world’s leading producer and exporter of farmed catfish Pangasius (sold as "Bassa" in Australia), and one of the world’s five leading exporters of brackish shrimp.

The Mekong Delta in Vietnam is the main production area for shrimp and fish aquaculture. These industries are facing serious challenges, including disease management and failure to meet market requirements for traceability.

High Water Quality is essential for sustainable aquaculture and people's health!

For Vietnam to have disease-free aquaculture in its Delta, it's vital that all the riparian Lower Mekong countries introduce laws and enforce treatment strategies to clean wastewater discharges by industry and farming along the Mekong River and its tributaries, as well as, establish reliable sewage treatment.

A multinational concerted effort is essential because the Delta is the repository of all the Mekong upstream pollution! This necessarily affects the productivity in this area and Vietnam’s 20 Million inhabitants in it!

Water and fish contamination, and the impacts on the health of people in the Lower Mekong basin has been well documented, and is an ever increasing problem. Below we mention only a few examples.

High levels of Mercury contamination in water, fish and people in the Srepok River Basin - a major tributary of the Mekong River in Cambodia, has been reported by Murphy, et al. 2013 (see excerpt below). The authors attributed the main sources of contamination to Gold mines, Deforestation, and alert that Hydropower Dams will potentially increase the Mercury levels in fish 5-fold!

"The mercury used by artisanal miners to extract gold contaminates thousands of miners. The extent of the toxic zone from gold mines is not clear due to the compounding effect of deforestation that is likely a larger source of mercury than the gold mines. Downstream from the gold mines, the levels of mercury in human hair in the Srepok River Basin are three to five times higher than that recommended by USEPA (1 μg g–1) and the level found associated with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder in the United States. In the same area, mercury in hair is at similar levels as has been correlated with suppressed male fertility in Hong Kong.

Fishes in the Srepok River already show levels of mercury that exceed USEPA human consumption guidelines by 4–11 times!

This problem could become worse with the completion of new hydroelectric dams, which typically increases levels of mercury in fish by fivefold.

Unregulated Chinese traditional medicines sold in pharmacies exceed international guidelines by up to 30,000 times. Children’s toys contain up to 2% mercury. Finally, there is widespread use of skin whitening creams with
mercury that exceeds ASEAN guidelines by up to 35,000 times.

Conclusion: Further field mercury monitoring of water, fish, and people is needed in Cambodia as the potential for toxicity is significant. Anticipated health problems are subtle and require professional analysis to detect. Those most at risk are women of child-bearing age and children. Assessment of mercury contamination must include several sources of mercury."
(Murphy, T. et al., 2013. Emerging problems with Mercury in Cambodia. https://researchgate.net (PDF).www.maralte.com/GHP, Vol. 01, Issue 02: 133-134.http://dx.doi.org/10.5645/ghp2013.01.016 )

In May 2018, a Chinese Gold mine released toxic waste (Cyanide & Chromium) into tributaries in several areas of NE Cambodia, which killed 18 people & 300 hundred were placed in intensive care!

"Toxic substances including chromium and cyanide used to flush gold mines were improperly handled and seeped into a river, sickening hundreds and killing more than a dozen people in two northeastern Cambodian provinces, the country's industry minister said....

Minister of Industry and Handicraft Cham Prasidh told Cambodian media that the government will take action against mining outfits responsible for allowing toxic mining chemicals to seep into the water supplies of Kratie and Mondulkiri provinces.

...The substances were found at various mining sites...and the ministry believed that they were improperly handled and that rain washed them into the river.

...Cambodia's minister of health put the total number of deaths in Kratie at 14, while local villagers and authorities say 18 people died.

...The contamination was caused by a Chinese mining company that had been drilling upstream near the water source, he told RFA's Khmer Service on Tuesday."

All these toxic chemicals in tributaries end up in the Mekong River and in the Delta affecting the health of aquaculture fish & shrimps, as welll as that of humans who consume these.

In Laos, hundreds of farm workers have become extremely ill since 2012 to date, by exposure to excessive toxic chemicals (e.g. pesticides, herbicides,rodenticides) used in Chinese Banana Plantations. To date, six farm workers have died of exposure, and many more deaths remain unrecorded.

The problem became so extreme the Laos government banned the banana plantations and will not renew their leases.

Unfortunately, the contamination of ground & surface waters continues unabated to date until the current leases expire…

Hence, such toxins continue to affect the health of aquatic animals in the Mekong River system, and most probably that of aquaculture animals in the Delta.

On Feb 1, 2017 www.asianews.it reported: "Chinese plantations generally produce the world's top banana, the Cavendish. However, growing Cavendish bananas in Laos’s northern provinces requires the use of a cornucopia of pesticides, herbicides, rodenticides, and fertilisers to boost production and ward off the 28 diseases and 19 insects that attack banana plants.

The use of the chemicals has increased production, but has also polluted ground water.

Conditions for banana workers are so bad that plantation owners allow them to work on a plantation for only three years because they fear they will die there.

“Chinese investors only think of their benefits. They invest lots of money, and they take advantage of the villagers,” the official said. "The plantations in Tonpheung and Bokeo have now been banned, and they are slowly leaving.”

"Lao workers at Chinese-operated banana plantations are falling ill in large numbers from exposure to chemicals used on the farms, with many suffering from respiratory or liver problems, sources in the Southeast Asian nation say.

Lao government orders began closing down the environmentally destructive farms in the country’s northern provinces in January 2017, with the ban shuttering the commercial operations when their contracts expire and forbidding new contracts from being signed.

In the Maung Sing district of northern Laos's Luang Namtha province, meanwhile, at least 20 banana workers, many already having left their work on the farms, come each month to the local hospital for treatment, a hospital official told RFA’s Lao Service.

“The chemicals affected their health after they had worked for even six months or one to two years in the fields,” RFA’s source said, speaking on condition of anonymity. “Now they have liver problems, and are chronically tired and fatigued when they come to us, sometimes with related diseases.”

"Pregnant women working in the fields are especially at risk from chemical exposure, the hospital official said, adding that many go into labor prematurely, sometimes giving birth to deformed children."

In a 2016 report, by Laos’s Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, six Lao farm workers died of pesticide or herbicide inhalation during the period 2012 to 2015, with three deaths reported in Champassak province in the south, and two in Xieng Khouang province and one in Bokeo province in the north." https://www.rfa.org/english/news/laos/chemicals-05302018162633.html )

Such toxic chemicals not only pollute groundwaters, but also pollute surface waters by run-off during the rainy season. These toxins travel attached to sediments and in the water column from tributaries into the main stream of the Mekong River, and end up in the Vietnam Delta - affecting the health of all aquatic life including aquaculture animals, and that of human consumers not just locally, but around the world!

Clean Water = Disease-free fish, shrimps and people!!!

Monitoring disease in aquaculture farms is indeed great news. However, monitoring alone will not improve the health of shrimp & fish in the Mekong Delta, which impact the health of human consumers around the world!

Monitoring will point out that animals are diseased and aquaculturists will just add more chemicals & antibiotics to the fish ponds, cages and tanks - thus, further polluting the surrounding waters and perpetuating the problem!

RECOMMENDATIONS:

The problems in the Mekong Delta can't possibly be solved by Vietnam alone! There needs to be a concerted effort by all upstream Mekong riparian countries to clean their act, not just for the benefit of their own economy, environment and people, but also to help Vietnam's Delta productivity and the wellbeing of its 20 Million inhabitants!

1. Funds MUST be made available for monitoring not just disease in aquaculture farms in the Delta, but also for monitoring focus points of pollution along the Mekong River mainstream, its tributaries, and the Delta. It's of little use trying to fix the Delta if it continues to be the repository of all upstream pollution!

2. Riparian countries MUST impose laws and enforce the use of technologies for waste-water treatment by industry along the Mekong River, its tributaries and the Delta.

3. Riparian countries MUST develop effective sewage treatment along the Mekong River, its tributaries and especially in the Delta itself!

4. Another important management strategy to reduce disease in aquaculture cages & ponds, and reduce the usage of antibiotics and more chemicals to heal farmed animals is to reduce overcrowding!

Aquaculture farmers wrongly believe that they can make more money by putting too many animals in the same tanks, cages and/or ponds.

5. Education campaigns are necessary to inform farmers that overcrowding inevitably has the following consequences:
1) Stresses the animals - making them more susceptible to disease and reducing their growth;
2) Increases animal faeces & food waste, resulting in increased levels of nitrates, other nutrients and bacteria - increasing the risk of disease;
3) Excess nutrients pollute the water in tanks, cages and ponds reducing the animals's growth and affecting their health;
4) Farmers will loose money by reduced animal growth, disease and chemicals necessary to combat disease; and
5) Contaminated Wastewater discharges pollute the surrounding waters - to the detriment of all!
~~~~~~~~~~~
Clean Waters are the Right of every animal, plant and human on Earth!

💥 MUST READ 💥 Excellent and comprehensive article on the #impacts of #Hydropower Dams - from the Mekong to the Amazon basin, climate change, GHG Emissions and more..
Full article below.

"When the dam broke, it brought with it a torrent of water and mud, killing at least 31 people and displacing upwards of 6,000 people across Laos and Cambodia. Reported numbers of those still missing range from “many” to “hundreds.” The flood, by even the secretive Lao government’s conservative estimates, would have been enough to drown Manhattan in 28 feet of water.

This is what the hydropower boom has come to in Laos. And yet, the deaths and destruction so evident following the July 22 collapse are only the most visible consequences of the country’s dam-building efforts and the hydropower boom globally.

Across the developing world, dams continue to #forcibly#displace and thereby #impoverish millions of people, drain national budgets, emit greenhouse gases, and destroy the ecological balance of entire river basins — balances on which millions of people intimately depend. At the same time, climate change — and the droughts and superstorms it exacerbates — is rendering hydroelectricity the most vulnerable source of power on offer.

Backed by recent research, here are five key things that governments, development financiers, and other proponents of development-by-dams seem to consistently forget.

💥 1. Large dams have displaced tens of millions of people, impoverishing many in the process. And the trend is not abating.
In 2015, in a rare but welcome move, the World Bank owned up to its complicity in a concerning trend that frequently falls under the radar: infrastructure projects, often advertised with the primary aim of poverty alleviation, forcibly displace millions of people per year. In more cases than not, the most vulnerable of local populations are the ones who suffer, and neither their governments, nor any other projects proponents, typically compensate them for their losses.

According to Dr. Michael Cernea, one of the world’s leading resettlement experts and former World Bank Senior Adviser for Sociology and Social Policy, large hydropower dams constitute the sector responsible for the most displacement. Drawing on World Bank data in a new book, Cernea estimates that in the period from 2011 to 2020 more than 200 million people will have been forcibly displaced by development projects worldwide.

The magnitude of resettlement required by even a single dam can be massive. Brazil’s Sobradinho Dam ousted 65,000. India’s Narmada Dam project forced out more than 200,000. In 2002, the World Commission on Dams estimated that, throughout history, dams have displaced 40 to 80 million people in total.

(Photo - A fisherman checks his traps in the Srepok River near Kbal Romeas Village, Cambodia. Earlier this year, the Lower Sesan 2 dam flooded the village and others around it, forcibly displacing 5,000 people in total. Scientists predict that the same dam will knock out 9 percent of the entire Lower Mekong basin’s annual fish catch. Photo by Gus Greenstein. November 2014.)

From 1990-2010, more than 1,400 World Bank projects triggered the institution’s “Involuntary Resettlement Policy.” Compensation for the displaced, even by the Bank’s standards, was dismal. Fewer than 50 percent of those displaced by these projects had their livelihoods “restored.” At the same time, the World Bank is known to have some of the strongest social-environmental safeguards of any development financier.

Development-induced impoverishment numbers associated with other financiers are likely much higher, but such data do not exist.

💥 2. More often than not, large dams run over budget and under-deliver on benefits — severely enough, in some cases, to put entire national economies at risk.
Without even taking into account the economic destruction wrought by forced displacement, and without even considering environmental impacts, large dams are simply not worth their cost.

Analyzing a sample of 245 large dams, the most comprehensive dataset of its kind, Oxford economists found that “the capital sunk into building nearly half of the dams could not be recovered.” Much of this stems from poor cost-benefit forecasting. They uncover “overwhelming evidence that budgets are systematically biased below actual costs of large hydropower dams — excluding inflation, substantial debt servicing, environmental, and social costs.”

Here, again, the #burden of a single dam can be enormous: the authors’ model predicts that Pakistan’s under-construction Diamer-Bhasha dam, initially forecast to cost $12.7 billion, will ultimately require $35 billion (both 2008 dollars) — roughly one quarter of the country’s GDP.

There may even be #global#consequences to such project development. In a subsequent study on China’s international infrastructure boom, the same Oxford team finds that “poorly managed infrastructure investments are a main explanation of surfacing economic and financial problems in China.”

The Oxford researchers add: “Unless China shifts to a lower level of higher-quality infrastructure investments, the country is headed for infrastructure led financial and economic crisis, which is likely also to be a crisis for the international economy.”

💥 3. Large #hydropower is #not#emissions#free. It can generate greenhouse gases more than 30 times as potent as carbon dioxide, frequently contributing more to climate change than fossil fuels plants of equivalent generating capacity.

Every time you see a report counting “hydroelectricity” as “renewable” or “zero-emissions,” look up the credentials of its author. Hydropower is not always clean.

Large dams often flood vast vegetated areas. When they do, that vegetation rots underwater, eventually releasing #methane, a greenhouse gas 34 times as potent as carbon dioxide. In some cases, large dams can result in even more lifetime greenhouse gas emissions than would equivalent conventional sources.

In a 2016 study, leading reservoir emissions scientist Phillip Fearnside found that emissions from “18 dams that are planned or under construction” in the Brazilian Amazon “would exceed those from electricity generation based on fossil fuels.”

Once more, let’s look at the effects of a single dam. Recent analyses performed using the NGO Conservation Strategy Fund’s HydroCalculator tool — open-source software that performs basic cost-benefit analyses of hydroelectric dams with user input data — estimated that Bolivia’s planned Rositas dam reservoir will produce 70 million tons of CO2-equivalent emissions. That’s more than the state of South Carolina emits in a year. Note that these numbers do not include the emissions resulting from constructing dams – cement and equipment-heavy projects that usually take several years to build.

Unfortunately, some of our leading institutions continue to mistake large dams as “emissions-free,” misleading governments, the public, and the researchers who build the climate change/energy production simulations that guide policy.

The #United :Nations Economic Commission for Europe calls hydropower a “cost-competitive #renewable energy source” which “contributes to decarbonising the energy mix.” In its Sustainable Development Goals Tracker, the popular data visualization site Our World in Data counts hydropower capacity in its renewable energy indicator. Even the International Energy Agency is still calling hydropower “renewable.”

Meanwhile, a recent Washington State University study finds that methane emissions are currently not included in global greenhouse gas inventories.

💥 4. Large dams can #destroy the #ecological#balances of entire river basins, and, with them, the livelihoods of millions of people.
One need not look further than Laos, and the Mekong Basin in which it sits, as a case in point.

In the summer of 2016, a journalist colleague, Austin Meyer, and I traveled the length of the Lower Mekong River — from nearby the site of the Xe-Pian Xe-Namnoy collapse in Laos to Cambodia, the Vietnam Delta, and the South China Sea. We found and illustrated how large dams on the Mekong mainstream and its tributaries are impacting communities throughout the region — each severely, but in a diverse variety of ways.

By obstructing nutrient flows from the upper Mekong River and hastening erosion, allowing saltwater to intrude upstream, dams are destroying rice paddy fields in Vietnam’s Mekong Delta. Photo by Gus Greenstein. August 2016.
While hydropower will transform the greater part of Southeast Asia, the roots of the problem lie in Laos: a 2010 study suggests that, taken together, the Mekong mainstream dams Laos plans to build, along with two others proposed by Cambodia, could wipe out roughly 40 percent of the wider Mekong Basin’s commercial fish catch, valued at more than $500 million annually.

In the villages floating on Cambodia’s #Ton_Le_Sap lake, fishing conditions — once the backbone of sustenance and economic activity — have #deteriorated such that young people are now regularly making the dangerous and illegal journey to construction jobs in Thailand.

In the “rice bowl” region of Vietnam, once-lime-green paddy fields are turning yellow, evaporating annual incomes, as dams hasten erosion (allowing salty sea water to intrude upstream), and impede the flow of nutrients on which farmers rely.

Where it enters the South China Sea, the Mekong River spills nearly 200 tons of nutrient-rich sediment into the ocean every minute, creating some of the most productive fishing grounds in the world. There, fishermen carry on, largely unaware of the difficulties to come. Regional scientists predict that, by blocking this flow of nutrients, dams will ultimately mean the end of the Mekong Plume as it is known today.

Given the degree to which “development” institutions continue to promote large hydropower projects, one may find it difficult to believe that there is a #huge#literature on this topic. For more, read about the Kariba dam’s #impoverishment of 57,000 indigenous people, and about how Brazil’s Belo Monte dam has turned an Amazonian village into one of the poorest and most violent cities in Brazil.

💥 5. As #climate_change renders weather patterns more unpredictable, large #dams will become increasingly susceptible to #catastrophic#failure, and less reliable forms of energy production.
If this list of impacts is not enough, it is going to get worse. As climate change continues to show itself in fuller color, storms like the ones that helped lead the Xe-Pian Xe-Namnoy dam to fail will become much more frequent. In other places, water inputs, without which hydroelectric dams cannot produce energy, will become unreliable at best.

This is already happening. In 2015, less than a year’s worth of sub-normal rainfall caused the Hoover Dam’s electricity generation capacity to shrink by half. In 2016, droughts caused Lake Kariba, the largest man-made reservoir in the world, to dry up, leading to blackouts in both Zambia and Zimbabwe. A report by the environmental NGO International Rivers argued that, given its reliance on hydropower in the age of climate change, southern Africa is “moving toward the edge of ecological precipice.”

Global electricity demand is rapidly rising at the same time that climate change is rendering storms worse and predictable rainfall a thing of the past. These are toxic investment conditions for infrastructure that relies on constant water inputs – and that can kill when storms hit.

💥 International organizations must come to terms

Despite these lessons — learned over and over again, only with greater consequences each time — it seems clear: the global hydropower boom will not end as a result of individual national governments recognizing and acting on their hydropower amnesia.

The Lao government has temporarily suspended all of its new hydropower projects while it carries out safety inspections of existing dams. Yet there is little to no talk of cancellation, and more than 3,500 hydropower dams are planned or under construction worldwide. As of last year, more than 420 hydroelectric dams were currently under discussion in South America, many of which will go straight on top of tropical rainforests and indigenous communities while blocking major arteries of the Amazon. Hydropower development in Africa is faster now than in any previous decade. The political expediency of erecting such grandiose infrastructure, and the profit it can entail, appears stronger than ever.

The #destructive#hydropower boom will only end when international entities such as the UN, and the financiers that make such projects possible, begin to talk about large hydropower dams as they too often turn out to be: sources of mass #eviction and #impoverishment, macroeconomic #liabilities, #climate change enablers, poison for river basins and the communities that depend on them – and vulnerable to the climate future they have already helped lock in.